Bradford v. Baker

Filing 239

ORDER Granting 237 Motion to Extend Time. Respondents' motion to dismiss will be treated as timely filed. In all other respects, the schedule for further proceedings set forth in the scheduling order entered April 11, 2024 (ECF No. 229 ) w ill remain in effect (Petitioner's response to the motion to dismiss will be due January 31, 2025). Responses due by 1/31/2025. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 12/4/2024. (For Distribution by law library.)(Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - RJDG)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

JULIUS BRADFORD,

Case No. 2:13-cv-01784-RFB-EJY

5

Petitioner,

ORDER

6

v.

7

JEREMY BEAN, et al.,

8

Respondents.

9
10

In this habeas corpus action, the pro se petitioner, Julius Bradford, filed a third amended

11

habeas petition on April 2, 2024. ECF No. 227. Respondents were due to file a response to

12

Bradford’s third amended petition by November 22, 2024. See ECF Nos. 229, 231, 234, 236. On

13

November 25, Respondents filed a motion for extension of time (ECF No. 237), requesting an

14

extension to December 2. On December 2, Respondents filed a motion to dismiss within the time

15

contemplated in the motion for extension of time. ECF No. 238.

16

In their motion for extension of time, Respondents’ counsel states that they filed the motion

17

after the due date to be extended because of computer problems, and that the extension of time is

18

necessary to effectively represent Respondents’ interests. The Court finds that the motion for

19

extension of time is made in good faith and not solely for the purpose of delay, and that there is

20

good cause for the extension of time. The Court will grant the motion for extension of time.

21

Bradford’s response to the motion to dismiss will be due on January 31, 2025. See

22

Scheduling Order, ECF No. 229 (60 days for response to motion to dismiss).

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///
1

1

It is therefore ordered that Respondents’ Motion for Enlargement of Time (ECF No. 237)

2

is granted. Respondents’ motion to dismiss will be treated as timely filed. In all other respects, the

3

schedule for further proceedings set forth in the scheduling order entered April 11, 2024 (ECF No.

4

229) will remain in effect (Petitioner’s response to the motion to dismiss will be due January 31,

5

2025).

6
7

DATED: December 4, 2024

8
9
10

RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1